Disposal_and_Demil_-_QASP_6june2016.pdf

J. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure systematic quality assurance methods are used in this performance based service task order/contract. The Contractor shall perform in accordance with the QASP performance metrics, and the Government shall receive the quality of services identified in the task order/contract. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this acquisition.

This contract provides assistance with Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) Treatment of Energetic Materials. The resulting performance based contract will have cost plus fixed fee Labor CLINs, and cost only Other Direct Cost (ODC) CLINs. The period of performance for this contract will cover a base and four (4) options for a total of five (5) years. A properly executed QASP will assist the Government in achieving the overall objectives of this procurement.

2. AUTHORITY

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services and documentation called for in service contracts, to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3. SCOPE

The QASP is put in place to provide Government surveillance and oversight of the Contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract.

The Contractor’s performance on this contract will be evaluated by the Government as described below and summarized in the Contractor Self-Assessment Milestone Chart. The first evaluation will cover the period ending six months after date of contract award, with successive evaluations being performed in accordance with the Contractor Self-Assessment Milestone Chart, until the Contractor completes performance under this contract. The evaluation will encompass all work performed by the Contractor during the assessment period, but will not include cumulative information from prior assessments. The Contractor will complete a self-assessment of the work performed, to be delivered to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the Contract Administrator, as identified in the contract, No Later Than (NLT) 60 days after the end of the assessment period. The self-assessment shall cover all areas of the Government QASP. Based on the evaluation results, provided by the COR and the Contract Administrator, the Contracting Officer will assign an overall performance rating. If the Contracting Officer assigns an “Unsatisfactory” performance rating for the period evaluated, the next option period will not be exercised. A final assessment shall be completed by the Government within four months of the completion date of the contract(inclusive of all exercised options).

CONTRACTOR SELF-ASSESSMENT MILESTONE CHART

BASE OPTION I OPTION II OPTION

III OPTION

IV

CLOSE

Month 1 PD 1 Month 1 PD 2 Month 1 PD 3 Month 1 PD 4 Month 1 PD 5 Month 1 Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 2 Month 3 Month 3 Month 3 Month 3 Month 3

Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 5 Month 5 Month 5 Month 5 Month 5 Month 6 Month 6 Month 6 Month 6 Month 6 Month 7 PD 2 Month 7 PD 3 Month 7 PD 4 Month 7 PD 5 Month 7 Month 8 Month 8 Month 8 Month 8 Month 8 Month 9 Month 9 Month 9 Month 9 Month 9 Month 10 Month 10 Month 10 Month 10 Month 10 Month 11 Month 11 Month 11 Month 11 Month 11 Month 12 Month 12 Month 12 Month 12 Month 12

Contractor Self- Assessment Reporting Due Date

4. GOVERNMENT RESOURCES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following Government resources shall have responsibility for the implementation of this QASP:

Procurement Contracting Officer – The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interest of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the PCO that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance. The PCO for this contractis identified in Section G.

Contract Administrator – An individual assigned by the PCO to assist in the daily administration of the contract. The Contract Administrator also provides input to the PCO and the COR as to the quality of performance for areas addressed in this QASP. The Contract Administrator for this contract is identified in Section G.

Contracting Officer’s Representative – The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for technical administration of the contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the Contractor deems may affect contract price, terms or conditions shall be referred to the PCO for action.

Government Technical Point of Contact – The COR designates an individual Government Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) to assist in administering specific projects under the contract. The Government TPOC is responsible for assisting in administering a specific project under the contract. A Government TPOC cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the contract, make commitments or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf.

5. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

a. QASP – The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used by the COR in the technical administration and the PCO/Contract Administrator in non-technical administration of this QASP.

The QASP will be the prime determinant in exercising the option.

b. Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) – The market place for information technology, engineering, and management support services is very competitive. As such, the successful offeror has a vested interest in the Government generated CPARS under this task order/contract. Additionally, an evaluation using the CPARS format will be performed at the end of each year of performance. This evaluation will be one determinant in exercising an option.

For this procurement, the Government will address the quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, and other important areas. As this information may affect future source selections throughout DoD, and the continuation of the contract, the annual Government assessment will be used appropriately as an additional performance oversight and communication tool with the QASP.

6. DOCUMENTATION

In addition to providing annual reports to the Contracting Officer, the COR will maintain a complete Quality Assurance file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the quality assurance function. The COR shall forward these records to the Contracting Officer at termination or completion of the contract.

7. SURVEILLANCE

The tables below set forth the performance ratings, standards, outcome and surveillance methods to document the results of the surveillance on an annual basis, as well as interim and informal reviews (i.e., In-Process Reviews (IPRs)) on a more frequent basis.

(a) Performance Ratings: The Government will evaluate the Contractor’s performance of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and the Contracting Officer will assign one of the following ratings:

(1) Excellent

(2) Satisfactory

(3) Unsatisfactory

The standards associated with these ratings are given in the following Table 1:

Table 1: Overall Performance Ratings

Overall Performance Rating Standard Excellent “Excellent” ratings for all performance evaluation criteria.

Satisfactory A minimum of “Satisfactory” ratings for all performance evaluation criteria.

Unsatisfactory A rating of “Unsatisfactory” for one or more performance evaluation criteria.

(b) Objectives/Determination

1. Interim/Informal

Interim/Informal performance evaluations will be provided to assess performance at each IPR.

2. Annual

The PCO will make a performance determination at the end of each evaluation period. The determination will be based upon the COR’s recommendations, the Contractor’s comments, including any Self-Evaluation Report, and any other information deemed relevant by the PCO.

The PCO shall resolve disagreements between the COR’s recommendations and the Contractor’s comments/report regarding the evaluation. The PCO’s performance determination is unilateral and final. The PCO will document the determination and provide a copy to the Contractor within 30 days of receipt of the Contractor’s self-assessment.

Table 2: Objectives

Assessment Period Acceptable Performance Definition

Assessment Method Outcome

First 6 Months of the Base Period of the Task Order (Period 1)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the Task Order.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option I.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option I.*

Last 6 months of Base Year and the first 6 months of Option I (Period 2)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the Task Order.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option II.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option II.*

Last 6 months of Option I and the first 6 months of Option II (Period 3)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the Task Order.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option III.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option III.*

Last 6 months of Option II and the first 6 months of Option III (Period 4)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the Task Order.

(+) Meets the acceptable performance definition as condition for exercise of Option IV.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for exercise of Option IV.*

Last 6 months of Option III and all of Option IV (Period 5)

All measurement areas rated at least “Satisfactory”

Using the QASP evaluation criteria set forth in the Task Order.

Final QASP Rating

*The Government will not exercise the next option year term unless the contractor meets the acceptable performance definition.

(c) Performance Evaluation Criteria. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the criteria and standards provided for each objective and identified in Tables 3 through 5 of this contractQASP.

(d) Organization. The performance evaluation organization consists of the PCO, who will serve as the Determining Official, and the COR. In some instances, a TPOC will be assigned to the task order/contract in addition to the COR.

(e) This performance evaluation does not replace any other requirement for evaluating Contractor performance that may be required by this contractsuch as a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report or other required reports.

Table 3: Task Performance Evaluation Criteria and Standards

Criterion Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent Task Performance Work product fails to meet

Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in Performance Requirements Summary Table (4).

Work product routinely meets Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in Performance Requirements Summary Table 4.

Work product frequently exceeds Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) defined in Performance Requirements Summary Table 4.

Staffing Contractor provides marginally qualified or unqualified personnel. Lapses in coverage occur regularly.

Contractor provides qualified personnel. Lapses in coverage may occasionally occur and are managed per individual contract policy.

Contractor provides highly qualified personnel. Contractor reassigns personnel to ensure proper coverage.

Actual lapses in coverage occur very rarely, if ever, and are managed per contract policy.

Contractor ensures staff training remains current.

Cost Management Contractor routinely fails to complete tasks within agreed upon cost, i.e., cost over runs frequently occur

ODC funds are not properly tracked and/or are not within the scope of the contract.

Contractor routinely completes task within the originally agreed upon cost.

Funds and resources are generally used in a cost-effect manner. No major resource management problems are apparent

Reductions in direct and indirect costs to the Government below contract estimated costs are noteworthy.

Contractor provides detailed cost analysis and recommendations to

ODCs are reasonable, within scope, and clearly identified.

government for resolution of problems identified.

Funds and resources are optimally used to provide the maximum benefit for the funds and resources available.

Documented savings are apparent.

Cost Reporting Reports are generally late, inaccurate, incomplete, or unclear

Reports do not accurately track and clearly identify ODC items

Reports are timely, accurate, complete, and clearly written.

Problems and/or trends are addressed and analysis submitted.

Reports are clear, accurate, and proactive.

Problems and/or trends are addressed thoroughly, and the contractor’s recommendations and/or corrective plans are implemented and effective.

Timeliness Contractor frequently misses deadlines, schedules, or is slow to respond to government requests or is non-responsive to government requests.

Contractor routinely meets deadlines, schedules, and responds quickly to government requests.

Contractor always meets deadlines, schedules, and responds immediately to government requests.

Customer Satisfaction Fails to meet customer expectations.

Meets customer expectations. Exceeds customer expectations to the benefit of the overall tasking.

Combating Trafficking in Persons IAW with

FAR 52.222-50

Contractor has not briefed contractor employees on Combating Trafficking in Persons and is not in compliance with FAR clause 52.222-50

Contractor has briefed contractor employees on subject guideline and is working to develop an Awareness Program.

Contractor has Trafficking in Persons Awareness Program in place which includes appropriate reporting procedures, applicable remedies, and disciplinary actions and appears to be performing vigilant monitoring.

Table 4: Performance Requirements Summary Table

SOW

Task Area

Fill-in

(Reference

PWS

Paragraph section below)

Performance Objective

Fill-in (Objective per referenced PWS section in first column)

Performance Standard

(Adapt Language as necessary to suit requirement)

Acceptable Quality Level requirement)

Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan Typical

Monitoring Methods requirement)

3.1 Hazardous

Waste Treatment

Contractor treat energetic (D003) hazardous waste per task order and SOW.

Closed demil technology preferred

Contractor shall perform treatment in conformance with RCRA regulations, best management practices and closed

Treatment of materials in task order shall be completed on schedule;

shall result in no Notices of Violation; shall use closed demil technologies

Government evaluation of performance and validation of certificates.

methodology unless coordinated with customer.

demil methods minimizing emissions to air, ground and water. Demil shall be in accordance with SOW, resulting in disposal or resource recovery and recycling in accordance with current regulatory standards. There shall be no Notices of

Violation from State or Federal authorities based on treating materials enumerated in task order.

Certificate of destruction shall be submitted per SOW and task order requirements.

unless alternative methods are prearranged; shall be followed by certificate per the SOW for materials of the manifested quantity in each task order.

3.2

Hazardous Waste

Transportati on

If required by task order, contractor shall arrange for shipment of hazardous waste to

Treatment, Storage and Destruction

Facility per each task order and the SOW.

Contractor shall hire certified D003 reactive material and hazardous waste haulers and prepare required shipping papers including universal hazardous waste manifest and land ban documentation.

No violations of CFR 49 DOT or State regulation shall occur.

Government evaluation of performance and random validation of shipping records.

3.3

Hazardous Waste

Expertise

If required by task order, contractor shall assist Government by providing expertise in hazardous waste operation including shipping, demil equipment and methods, applicable RCRA and DOT standards and certification of treatment.

Expert knowledge will provide guidance in categories summarized in performance objective explained in

SOW.

Expert information is adequate to enable government to complete the treatment of reactive hazardous waste enumerated in task order.

Government review of adequacy of requested information to accomplish safe, environmentally correct treatment.

Table 5 entitled: “COST EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND STANDARDS”, shall be included when the contract will be cost-reimbursable.

TABLE 5: COST EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND STANDARDS

CRITERION UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY EXCELLENT

Cost Management

Contractor routinely fails to complete the effort within the originally agreed to estimated cost, i.e. cost overruns frequently occur.

ODC funds are not properly tracked and/or are not within the scope of the contract.

Contractor routinely completes the effort within the originally agreed to estimated cost.

Contractor provides measures for controlling all costs at estimated costs. Funds and resources are generally used in a cost-effective manner. No major resource management problems are apparent.

ODCs are reasonable, within scope, and clearly identified.

Reductions in direct costs to the Government below contract estimated costs are noteworthy. Contractor provides detailed cost analysis and recommendations to Government for resolution of problems identified.

Funds and resources are optimally used to provide the maximum benefit for the funds and resources available.

Documented savings are apparent.

Cost Reporting

Reports are generally late, inaccurate, incomplete or unclear.

Reports do not accurately track and clearly identify ODC items.

Reports are timely, accurate, complete and clearly written.

Problems and/or trends are addressed, and an analysis is also submitted.

Reports are clear, accurate, and pro-active. Problems and/or trends are addressed thoroughly, and the Contractor’s recommendations and/or corrective plans are implemented and effective.